Founded 1980
Chair:
Secretary:
Treasurer:
Graham Smith
Jan Thompson
Graham Mumby-Croft
Home
YOUR LETTERS
Welcome to your letters page which sadly contains a lone, but very welcome, contribution from my good friend Bob Duncan, who I am sure many of you will remember from his many years of service as a Governing Governor. I do hope that you are following the serialisation of his autobiographical treatise in another place in this publication.
Here is Bobs contribution to your letters page….
The departure of any colleague is a sad occasion but also a chance to think back and remind oneself of what you remember of that character and what they contributed to the Service. Those on Harry Brett’s email service will have noticed the passing now of almost all of the ‘leaders’ at the period when we served. The list includes Bill Brister, Brian Emes, Bill Driscoll, David Gould, Colin Honey, and a non-governor, Gareth Hadley. Those who were Governors were excellent in their leadership. Whatever each of us thought of them in their then more senior role they were dedicated and committed to achieving a Service dedicated to reformation and rehabilitation. In hindsight the Prison Board made one slight error in the allocation of the overall Budget, it devoted quite a lot to the removal of tattoos, now you cannot be a top rate professional footballer unless you are covered in tattoos. I kept in touch when I could with many of them, and most were involved in their local community.
To give 2 examples of what they were trying to achieve. Brian Emes was determined to introduce higher grade industrial workshops and more trade training workshops. He was not totally unsuccessful as contracts were secured for laundry washing for many hospitals and a number of commercial laundry companies. This naturally required some financial investment to upgrade the technology in some cases. Also introduced was work on garment manufacture, some of this was at the mundane level: though at one point a prison was producing all the shirts for a well-known brand of shirt (unfortunately I cannot recall which firm.) Within a few years the department decided it no longer wished to go down that road. A prison that had a contract with a large London Hospital, and who were very pleased with the arrangement, was advised that they could not bid for a new contract!
In addition, all Borstals had a wide range of trade training workshops, which had to be undertaken if it was specified on the individuals ‘Training Plan’ if he wanted to obtain an early release rather than serve the full two years. The incentive disappeared when Headquarters decided they should all become ‘mini prisons’ and they were released automatically under the standard prison rules. The second example was David Ramsbottom who added at the end of every Inspection Report I have read advised Headquarters that more trade training should be introduced. The advice was ignored.
Why I do see this as an issue? Well, recently a prison’s minister had a superb Idea; he would introduce more trade training and industrial workshops which would revolutionise a downward rate in the reconviction rate of discharges from prison. Very good, but why wait 20 years when it could easily have been established if the commitment and finance had been forthcoming when Brian Emes was attempting to do exactly that.
The saga does not end, when I first went to Elmley as member of the Independent Monitoring Board, it had two hair dressing salons training inmates in hairdressing, a bricklayers course which lasted 16 weeks and trained to a very high standard, and a -forklift drivers course; all leading to offers of employment.
All Governing Governors now receive from Head Office a priority task list for the year and are judged on it in respect to their Annual Report. It did not include a question on training courses; instead, the requirement was for every inmate to be engaged in ‘purposeful activity’, during the working week. In a large Local Prisons holding up to 2,000 inmates due to the population explosion, many are living 3 in a cell meant for 1. There was always going to be severe pressure on space especially as no addition workspaces were ever provided. As in the Bricklayers Shop, with space for bricks, mixers, and areas to construct example mini buildings, only 16 could be accommodated. As a more basic workshop undertaking mundane work sorting and packaging, probably 40 at least could be housed.
I have been reading a book written by two psychologists who were employed by a counselling firm and given a contract to offer psychotherapy to prisoners at a large local prison, not named but probably in London, for two years. They tell of the resistance they were originally shown by staff, including the Governor who would not allocate them an office so had to carry all their papers etc around with them. It is quite moving and worth reading as I was convinced that what they claimed they achieved was true. I had a sad moment of regret because I was privileged to sit with the Psychologist Counsellor at Emley. It was quite moving, but Elmley only had that service for one day a week and there always many who could not be seen.
I could not believe it when I read in the paper that there are 3,000 prisoners still serving indefinite sentences (IPPs) under the Act passed in 2005 but abolished in 2012 but not retrospectively. Their release has to be sanctioned by the Parole Board. That took me back to when that system worked well. When it was introduced, it was prison centred apart from life sentenced prisoners which were dealt with by Headquarters. The local panel consisted of the Governor, Chief Probation Officer, and an independent member, invariably the Chairman of the Board of Visitors as they were then. There was little cost except for travel expenses when claimed. I am mindful of the other great advantage was as all reports on the inmate had to be read in advance giving the Governor a chance to review the quality of the reports written by the staff. In addition, the entire panel had some knowledge of the establishment and some of the inmates. Then in about 1990, Headquarters decided it wanted to review the parole process. They came to Gartree to observe a panel at work and then interviewed the entire panel individually. I advised them strongly, a member of the public,’ and a senior Probation Officer. They are all paid a fee (£400 a day currently when sitting, which adds to the cost of the system.) Whether it was good innovation is very questionable, as the Probation Service has received criticism in the media and some MPs for poor supervision of discharges and some parole decisions.
In my role as an IMB member an inmate requested to see a Board Member. He explained he had been returned from a Cat ‘D’ establishment to a Cat ’B’ as a result of an adjudication. He admitted he was not a ‘model prisoner’, but the adjudication never took place. He was very concerned as he had a parole hearing due very soon at it would not help his chance of being successful. I advised him I would firstly check his Record to find out about the ‘Adjudication’ and reason for transfer. He was correct; there were no recent adjudication details in his record. That meant the reason given for transfer was also fabricated! I phoned the open prison and spoke to the governor, who displayed little interest; I said to validate the reason for transfer the paperwork and the reporting officer need to here and clear the matter up. I doubted I would see any action and did not. I discussed this with the inmate; he thanked me and then asked if I would attend his parole hearing, just to listen as he suspected that it would turn negative, and he did not think he would be in a mood to take it all in. I replied I would approach the Chairman of the panel and ask if I might sit in to observe. On his next visit I put the request to the Chairman; he replied we not have observers. I pointed out that the inmate concerned had been returned on a false pretence and there was a big difference in being considered as a cat ‘D’ and a cat ‘B’, and he suspected his establishment report would now be negative.
The chairman pondered for a few minutes, then reluctantly said ‘Yes’, but on no account can you speak. I accepted that and thanked him. The panel met and it was clear they had not all read paperwork in advance. On the day of the hearing, I went to the room holding the parole reviews, the clerk came out and explained that the Board were holding reviews on other cases, and I was to wait outside until his case came up and she would then call me in. It was a fairly large room with a raised platform at one end where the panel sat and looked down on the inmate sat in a chair in the middle of the room looking both anxious and lonely. It was clear that they had not all read the paperwork. The panel continued their discussion for a few minutes then turned to the inmate and asked a few initial general questions; a member of the panel then addressed the chairman and decreed that the ‘Home Circumstances Report,’ was not in the pack. (We were accustomed to this happening regularly and this just delayed the hearing whilst chasing it up.)
The chairperson, despite having a Senior Probation on the panel glared at the clerk and instructed her to obtain the phone number and name of the relevant Chief Probation Officer. He then phoned and berated said Officer in a tone that was like a Headmaster verbally chastising a pupil. He then alerted the Panel to the fact that they commenced the hearing; the same panel would be required to conclude it. So, as we watched they all consulted their diaries and eventually agreed on a date 6 weeks hence.
I advised the clerk that as soon as the Home Circumstances Report arrived, I would like to see it. I read it and it was very positive. I then looked forward to the resumed hearing; conscious that the inmate had waited and would be paroled 6 weeks later than he could have been. To my surprise the Panel granted parole, I was clearly pleased with the outcome but more so the inmate, I was for a short period his ‘hero.’ One should not project how one panel operated to all panels, but I suspect there is an element of it in other panels. To my mind the review of the system was not an improvement.
What used to be known as ’Grisly Risley’ when it was a Remand Centre, it much improved when it became a ‘Cat C prison. Apparently, it has seriously slipped backwards according to a recent Inspection Report. ‘The low-security jail’, which is meant to focus on training and resettlement so inmates can find a job when released, was still not fulfilling its function, with many prisoners locked up for 22 hours a day. It was holding at the time of the Inspection, 1,032 prisoners of whom 404 were serving sentences for sexual offences.
There were still no accredited programmes for sex offenders despite the Inspectorate having raised this seven years ago. In addition, it reported that preparation for releasing prisoners were often not good enough. Living conditions at the prison had deteriorated since the previous inspection with parts of the building ‘now beyond repair’. It blamed Prison Service bureaucracy for hampering progress.
The Prison Service official response in its usual form stated as always ‘We accept improvements must be made and we are already taking decisive action to address the serious issues raised in the report.’ I think I have heard that one before!
Harry Brett is an ardent supporter of Manchester City Football Club, who won European Champions League this summer. I made contact to congratulate him and asked if went to watch the match live in Istanbul. He said he was tempted; the cost would have been over £1,000. Linda said they could have a good holiday for that. He said his son went and said the behaviour of the local supporters after the game was dreadful and quite threatening. Harry and Linda are now going on a cruise to Canada as they find it a fascinating country. He will be back (icebergs avoided) to distribute the ‘Newsletter’. What would we do without him?
Had a long chat with Mike Poselay, he is still keeping busy as defence barrister. He agrees that the courts are in a mess, I am sure he said there was a backlog of 60,000 cases. He attends cases referred to him wherever they are located. All defendants have to report to the Court by 10am; but legal personnel just do not turn up. Some offering the excuse that Fire safety measures and evacuating measures are unsafe! They are often held there to 4pm in case other legal personnel do turn up eventually and the judge or magistrates are prepared to extend the normal working hours. A sorry state of affairs all round.
Mike governed Bullwood Hall and took a great interest in how female prisoners were treated. He felt the automatic strip searching of woman was unacceptable, he undertook a survey and found that rarely was anything found, and when it was, it was usually an item that did not pose of any kind of risk. As he had a brother who was a senior police officer, he also encouraged the police to follow similar procedures. He has also recently been to India, the Punjab area to discuss policy with them, and visit prisons there. He says in India female prisoners can have all their children up to 6 years with them. He observed that but did caution that on the whole the children were a bit wary of the officers.
I was sad to hear of the death David Roddan, he was the General Secretary of the PGA, and I was a member of the Committee. Later we both lived in March, Cambridgeshire. He was devastated when his wife departed. Initially he appreciated the support offered to him, but gradually he became more insular and withdrew into himself and avoided contact. He was a user of the computers in the local library and as a regular borrower of books I was able to have a chat with him. He spent hours planning trips into various parts of Europe by train and then went exploring.
So, there you have it, stop grumbling and put a smile on your face (despite feeling pretty rotten) there are no wimps amongst us!
Had a chat with Dave Simons, who is keeping well and has avoided any more accidents! He informs me the Prison Department has resurrected the plan to build a large ‘Local Prison’ opposite Gartree. It was first mooted in 1988 when I was at Gartree. I opposed it; Gartree is built on former farmland and the road to it is more a country lane leading to the picturesque village of Foxton and the nearby famous Foxton canal locks. The road, apart from staff living off site and the villagers, it is mainly used by tourists wanting to visit Foxton and the locks. Gartree has been largely accepted by the local community, including the estate agent when I was inquiring about property, ‘do not worry about the big sports centre as it has lights on at night as it is very busy’ I asked if she told everybody that, ‘yes ‘she said, and was a bit taken aback when I revealed that I was the new Governor of Gartree Prison. The Department did not on that occasion carry out its plans after all. Such a prison would not enhance the beauty of the local area. He also mentions that Market Harborough was expanding fast as there is housing development going on at a pace.
BOB DUNCAN
As ever please take time to write something that will be of interest to all your retired friends and colleagues and send them to me. Nice short chatty letters will be published in this section of the newsletter longer with more specific content will be considered for a separate entry in the Newsletter.
Address to use is roger@rsoutram.co.uk or Roger Outram, 12 Grove Park, Magazine Lane, Wisbech, PE13 1LF
Issue 89 Autumn 2023
Members Letters - Edited by Roger Outram.
My thanks to all contributors and as ever please take time to write something that will be of interest to all your retired friends and colleagues and send them to me. Nice short chatty letters will be published in this section of the newsletter longer with more specific content will be considered for a separate entry in the Newsletter.
Address to use is roger@rsoutram.co.uk or Roger Outram, 12 Grove Park, Magazine Lane, Wisbech, PE13 1LF.
Roger O
Please send Letters to: Roger Outram, 12 Grove Park, Magazine Lane, Wisbech, PE13 1LF
E-mail: roger@rsoutram.co.uk
Other contact: Telephone 01945 582624
